Why is /lit/ so intellectually rigorous and clinical, yet flames

It's because basic atheism became a normie thing for a bit, so it had to be criticised as a hegemonic position. Maybe if there's a religious revival, a more militant atheism will emerge. Leftypol, for example, has been emerging in response to the right coming to power on the back of left-wing inanity.

>>9259842
I think we just tend to shit on the obnoxious hitchens/dawkins form of atheism, mostly because of the way those "science writers" shit on the humanities. There is a growing trend in Positivism/Scientific Materialism to dismiss the necessity of philosophy, art, sociology, psychology. A pretension that the physical science of neuroscience will make these fields irrelevant.

The most aggravating part of these arguments against philosophy, is that they are all essentially epistomological arguments about the nature of knowledge. That is, they are philosophical statements made against philosophy.

I think for a lot of us here, the whole "Is God real" and what not is also just really fucking boring. I don't believe in God, but I understand that other people do. And I really don't care that much about it, since the dominant ideology in the west is essentially secular, consumerist.

most users have problems with women, religion is the perfect haven for a bitter hatred of women.

it's a meme you dip

You can make a solid case against the Abrahamic god, but not the idea of a creator itself. People like Hitchens and Dawkins arrogantly assume that they can know everything about the nature of the universe.

Although there comes a traditional 4chan "shitting on anything that's popular" action as well.

>>9259891
As long as you put agnostic before atheist and explain to someone that you hate arguing with theists so you put agnostic before atheist so they will leave you alone people will leave you alone.

File: 1488525437812.png (285KB, 1000x800px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 1000x800px

>>9259874
>There is a growing trend in Positivism/Scientific Materialism to dismiss the necessity of philosophy, art, sociology, psychology. A pretension that the physical science of neuroscience will make these fields irrelevant.
>implying this isn't 100% true

>>9259842
1. Because smug internet atheists are genuinely insufferable (not to imply that theists can be any less arrogant)
and 2. Because for many, if not most theists/agnostics, atheism was a stepping stone towards their current beliefs or ideals and they resent looking back on a reflection of themselves over-correcting and going full-blown hat-tipper for a phase.

>>9259927
how about we say fuck off to neuroscience because knowledge is unattainable and dedicating your life to finding it is unrewarding and unfulfilling as opposed to art and the humanities which is endlessly enriching to the mind (which is not the brain nigga) because we only got a few decades here n then we dead af so like, read books instead of doing science, dude

>>9259891
>You can make a solid case against the Abrahamic god, but not the idea of a creator itself.

I don't have to make a case against "the creator," you have to make a case for it. I derive no benefit from believing in such a concept

Atheism is increasing, so as a good contrarian I had to become a Christian. Nothing personal.

>>9259948
>humans are atheist by default
your logic is bad and you should feel bad

>>9259927
Even if it is "100% true", good luck proving that within the boundaries of scientific discourse and not resorting to historical, philosophical or metaphysical arguments.

Any discussion of the nature of knowledge, what kind of knowledge is best, the methods used to create knowledge, etc, falls firmly within the realm of Epistemological discourse.

Neuroscience has/can/will discover wonderful things about human nature. But it won't ever provide a discourse on history, ideology, or society.

Positivism is a philosophical school of thought. If a positivist wants to engage in philosophical debate, thats great! It's a point of view with merits!

>>9259951
A good contrarian would become a Buddhist or some south american tree worshiper

>>9259961
No, I need to bother the dominant ideology. They don't care about any of those things or Islam, they just hate Christianity.

>>9259961
I was actually considering what it would mean to revive the Mexica religions, you know, the Aztec Blood Cults and all that. Not sure I could really believe in the practice unless I went for full on human sacrifice and this seems like a short path to jail.

Also, I'd need to build a pyramid and I can barely afford rent as it is.

Because Christfags are annoying as fuck, even worse than Marxists, despite not apparently having a clue as to how to make a convincing argument.

i'm not even an atheist, but I haven't had a single interaction with an announced christian on /lit/ that didn't leave me despising him

>>9259891
>You can make a solid case against the Abrahamic god
No you can't, just meme arguments that were largely answered before they were even fucking made.
>>9259913
Agnosticism is worse than atheism.

>>9259948
>I derive no benefit from believing in such a concept

It will be hard to compete with the euphoria you are feeling at this moment.

>>9259979
>convincing
abloobloo truth is socially determined

i desire easily-digestible and dick-stroking rhetoric!

>>9259979
>i'm not even an atheist, but I haven't had a single interaction with an announced christian on /lit/ that didn't leave me despising him

I forgive you. May God have mercy on your soul.

>>9259986
it's incredible how you managed to get so very mad over an inoffensive word like "convincing"

christfags really are just insufferable

>>9259927
Basically, any knowledge gained from science is up for debate. Philosophy brings truths that are indoubitable. If you talk to any real science major they'll tell you the same thing, that science doesn't have all the answers; thats its practical but shouldn't be considered beyond its practicality. People who use science to argue against philosophy probably aren't scientists themselves, but mindless followers of whatever this age's "truth" is. It was god, now its science. But we, the shitposters of /lit/ understand that this trend, even if it takes a millenia, will pass. But literature, philosophy, art, they are here to stay for posterity. We know that these science prophets are just as silly now as the philosophers of religion were then, and there arguments just as illbased and misconcieved. If I publish a short story, I'm taking part in the great human commentary which spans all written time and experience. A scientist is merely poking something with a stick to see what happens; not to say their work isn't important, its just work.

>>9259957
Strawman. That's not what I said, all I said was, "Convince me of this," since he was making a claim. I'm not making any assertions about "all humans."

>>9259983
Literally, not an argument

>>9259988
tell me, do christfags act like arrogant blowhards online to make up for being so meek and timid irl?

>>9259994
You're the one who just admitted he is suffering, bub. Learn not to project.
>>9259999
>truth exists
Stop shitposting.
>>9260001
>arguments are good because the fedora in my heart says so

>calling /lit/ a whole body

>getting your feeling hurt online

I don't like when people criticize God without even trying, like other people said its obnoxious and there's too many great thinkers out there who I respect including joyce who were christians or believed heavily at one point in their life and that's enough for me to respect the faith.

>>9259986
Hey your that guy from here>>9259416
Whats your endgame anyway? Are you trying to make christians look bad?

>>9259948
i want you to die (hopefully no hell)
>>9260003
have you ever been to a church? churchgoers are very bombastic

File: bait.png (63KB, 625x626px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 625x626px

>>9260004
>>arguments are good because the fedora in my heart says so
>telling people to "stop shitposting" while you're shitposting

>>9260011
>doing anything i dont like must be shitposting

>>9260010
Wow, telling somebody to die over an anonymous internet weeaboo image board takes real gumption. Maybe next you could insult my mother?

>>9260019
your mom is probably a very nice woman who doesn't deserve having to worry about your eternal soul

>>9260001
for the record OP, this is why

>>9260023
She doesn't, she thinks it's nonsense as well. I thank you for your concern though.

>>9260026
>ask christians to give a coherent argument
>get called names
Yep, par for the course

>Are the same people who make posts about the illusion of consciousness and free will the same people who call anyone who shits on religion a fedora tipper?
No

>>9259913
Who said I wanted to be left alone? I want people to think I'm brilliant.

File: greek-orthodox-church.jpg (326KB, 916x611px) Image search: [Google]

326KB, 916x611px

/lit/ is a meta-Orthodox board.

>>9260030
>why wont you give me a two sentence proof of your ridiculously complex belief system within my own personal epistemological framework?
>can't do it huh? checkmate Christfags!

>>9261373
Its a belief, just like any other. Except, unlike other beliefs, christian beliefs have no bearing on our world, and following christian dogma does not effect it. Why believe in god when science shows me so much more?

File: 1126cbCOMIC_gm_god_god_man.jpg (694KB, 970x1283px) Image search: [Google]

694KB, 970x1283px

>>9261373
To add to my previos post, every other philosopher and thinker has cogent arguments when you approach them about their beliefs, they're more then willing to defend and debate ideas. But when christians are approached with any kind of argument they're like the worst kind of activist, the ones who plug their ears and say "lalala I can't hear you god is the one and only and most holy" because they don't want to even consider "wrong-thoughts". How can you be so firm in your beliefs if they haven't been shredded befote you, leaving only your mind to help pick up the pieces and rebuild it to something stronger. No one will ever respect christians with that attitude, and nonetheless, even god can't respect you guys anymore. No one in America has lived a christian life. We are a society of decadence and luxury. Sin runs through our veins. If one man were to be saved in all this ruin, live a true ascetic lifestyle, they would not be christian. They would be a disciple of Nietzche, or maybe, they'd become pure from their own conclusions. Its a farce and a joke and a hope and nothing more.

>>9261529
>our world
Ideology

Science shows you nothing, ideologue.
>>9261598
Wrong, you don't understand philosophy. m-m-m-m-m-muh lawwwwwwwwjik!

>>9261529
>Why believe in god when science
Fedoratism par excellence.
t. atheist

>>9261623
>Wrong, you don't understand philosophy. m-m-m-m-m-muh lawwwwwwwwjik!
Oh god, not this retard.

I remember you from /his/.

>>9261623
>>9261624
https://youtu.be/tABnznhzdIY

>>9261631
>anybody i dont like must be le retarded!
>>9261635
Zizek is a pseud, no one cares.

>>9261639
>>anybody i dont like must be le retarded!
Well if you think "logic" is an insult then yes.

>>9259842
/lit/ is not a monolith. I've consistently criticized theists here, as well as capitalists.

>>9261643
Yes it is, there's no non-referential defense for it.

>>9261656
You don't need to defend it, it's simply true.

1+1=2 and that's one of the few things that can be certain.

>>9259842
heisenberg wrote some papers on the defense of faith. that's protestant, but you're probably not ready for catholicism, orthodoxy, or the more eastern religions. protestantism and atheism are like babby's first US american belief system, like the corn syrup of beliefs.

>>9261666
>it's true because is said so
>1+1=2 and that's one of the few things that can be certain.
You're delusional.

>>9261667
Protestantism is unironically the best form of Christianity.

>>9261673
Does 1+1 not equal 2?

>>9261635
>let me post a youtube video to mask the fact I have no argumentative basis for my rampant fedoratism
I wouldn't be surprised if you start calling people cucks as an argument soon.

>>9261675
>live a decadent unchristian life
>call yourself a protestant
>go to heaven
wew

>>9261679
Why would it? You're presupposing logic. You cannot defend logic, if logic is paramount then it must be defensible by itself.

Just accept that you believe in the 'reason' meme because of secular Christianity, and before that secular Paganism, thinking it is something divine.

>>9259842
Atheism is no crime as long as it's done tastefully and cultivated with due diligence.

It's the people who don't understand the gravity and heady depths of heresy, who labor "Atheism" with a gross teleology they inherited from the very theists they oppose who conscript science for dogma, and never know anything other than their dreary material hopes of immortality, that are the problem. Don't ally yourself with them, they who keep their fedora's troubling all night and day, to thinker and lady alike.

"Believing in God" is the latest hottest contrarian meme against Reddit in 2015-2017.


>>9259851
Hahaha fucking first post best post

File: two cups.jpg (29KB, 700x394px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 700x394px

>>9261695
How many cups are in this picture?

>>9259842
Just like how a worm won't understand how the sun works in its lifetime. Humans would never find out how the earth was created.
There is no use in being a fedora tipper when you can't understand how the earth works.
Read bible before hating it.

>>9261693
>Do whatever you want.
>Tell a priest about it and play with some beads
>Go to heaven
wew

>>9261529
>>9261598
did you ever stop and think that maybe the problem isnt with Christians, but with yourself?

Your arrogance is stifling. Nobody is going to want to engage with you. You haven't shown an iota of willingness to be convinced of anything, and since you demonstrate no familiarity with any theological texts, everyone can see that discussing religious faith with you on 'intellectual' grounds would be a fruitless endeavor.

I hope that one day you will hear God who is always calling out to you. On that day, embrace him, and hold fast. Look towards him and avert your gaze. His kingdom may seem small and faint from a great distance, but as you strive towards it the magnificence and splendor come into view. When you are weary from your journey, he will give you rest.

>>9261701
I was baptized in 2008, try again fucko.

>>9259874
Dawkins is about as qualified to speak on religious prescription as Chomsky is on political prescription.

>>9261713
come now, anon, catholics don't believe they're going to heaven, just not the same level of hell as prods

>>9261718
*never avert

>>9259939
>they resent looking back on a reflection of themselves over-correcting and going full-blown hat-tipper for a phase.

Many a young loaf-tender does the dance of apology to this day, hoping to wash away the shame of those arrant loafless years.

There is but one loaf, the love almighty,
creator of meat and death, and all things edible and inedible. So saith our ancient creed.

File: 1463168420095.jpg (33KB, 666x360px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 666x360px

>>9259842

They are desperate to be rebellious against their mommies and normie hipster youth SJW culture which is predominately atheist and leftist, they think by clinging on to conservative western culture in a half-assed wanna-be way they are somehow being the opposite of what they are against. Which is reddit, hipsters, SJWs, etc. If they were teleported back in time when being christian and conservative was the norm they still wouldn't fit in because in the end the problem plaguing them isn't rooted in ideology it's rooted in that they were born an outcast and a freak, therefore blindingly swinging in a reactionary way against the grain is just another vain attempt to somehow fit in some click.

I have the feeling a majority of 4chan is going through a phase in which they started out as atheist fedoras in middleschool or something, then they discover /pol/ and become conservative, then maybe sometime down the line they will realize the immaturity of it all. Hopefully at least.

Maybe people don't realize that calling someone a "fedora" and using buzzwords like "reddit" etc is exactly the same type of stupid reactionary shit actual neckbeards do against religious people.

>>9259948
>>9260001
>>9260030
>>9261529
>>9261635
>>9261643
>>9261666
>>9261679
>>9261705
lol
the state of /lit/ these days

File: 1489311497426.jpg (63KB, 400x511px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 400x511px

>>9261718
Counterpoint: I hope one day you will join me in hell, making gay war on heaven, with the gorgeous boy Lucifer, second in beauty only to god, second in poetry to none.

What a dreamboat. All hail Venus, The Morning Star, Lucifer, the prettiest boy of them all, with all his hot poetic talk.

>>9261770
Says rhe loudmouthed little babby no one can tolerate for his constant prescriptive proselytizing

Surely none of you is unironically a believer right?

You are doing it for hipster cred right?

>>9261719
Wouldn't even be surprised if 9 year olds ran this board.

>>9259940
>dedicating your life to finding it is unrewarding and unfulfilling

god damn it you autists

>>9261894
Pretty sure there is a hearty contingent of True Believers on /lit/. Honestly, they are pretty high-quality posters when they don't let their godlove overflow them.

They know way more about literature than most entry-level fedoras and cultivate interesting spiritual intellects in their pursuit of god..

Because atheism shows lack of intellectual rigour

>>9259842
I want to snuggle Lucia Joyce.

I've noticed a large amount of 4chan Christians are incredibly smug, dumb and write extremely pseud posts. I have a hunch 4 years ago these people were fedora atheists that experienced a brief moment of self-awareness that they were mega-pseuds but rather than undergoing the introspection to not be a pseud they decided atheism was the problem and that by converting to Christianity this would fix their personal problems.

It would explain why a lot of Christposting reads like bizarro /r/atheism.

>>9261972
you use pseud a lot

>>9261960
Not per se but in its popular form, yes.

You could say the same about faith though. Most theists have not arrived at that position through an intellectual rigour.

>>9259874
>is just really fucking boring

I think this correct. But then I thought, Why not give one's heart, soul and mind to an entity that probably doesn't exist? If for no other reason than that it pre-empts this, that, or some other all-too-human idea (like Evolution) of co-opting the ground on which all such (((meme))) arguments ultimately rest? That an idea I can grasp is at the foundation of things is far less likely than that something indiscernible by my own mind (or any mind) but very much like it IS at the core. It would be a good /lit/ position-- the cult of the author. How well does Slothrop know Pynchon? Such is my case with respect to the.....but I am now thinking simultaneously of Leibniz and Robespierre (his cult) and have lost my faith at almost the moment I attained it.

>>9259842

>Am i missing something?

Yeah, a few IQ points.

90-105: unreflected faith
105-115: internet atheism
115-120: agnosticism
120-???: Christendom

>>9261972
*rehashes cosmological argument for the nth time*

>>9261909
I was 18.
>>9261985
Because he is one.
>>9262029
No atheism has any worth. Intellectualism is childish nonsense, there are better things.

>>9262059>>9262059
>No atheism has any worth. Intellectualism is childish nonsense, there are better things.

aaand with that comment you sacrificed any validity. Byebye

>>9262056
.>145: syncretic folk mysticism

>>9262065
>waaah HOW DARE YOU DISMISS MY IDEOLOGY REEEEE

>>9262056
>115-120: agnosticism
Wrong, agnosticism is absolutely stupid.

>>9262076
I have no ideology. I'm agnostic. I consider both sides. Dismissing one outright as you do is a sign of ideology.

>>9259842
If you believe in any religion just kys ty :)

>>9262082

False. Agnosticism is for those who are nearly there. Kant was an agnostic. You are an internet atheist. Your opinion is relevant in exactly zero cases.

Next.

>>9262084
>agnostic
That's an ideology you fucking dope.
>>9262098
I'm not an atheist. Kant was a fucking dope. Agnosticism is a child's stance.

By the way, Kant wasn't an agnostic.

>>9262121
Agnosticism is literally a lack of a definite position.

Looks like we have a new breed of pseudo-intellectual spawned directly from /lit/

First we had the pseudo-intellectual atheist. Now we have the pseudo-intellectual theist who just throws insults at anyone who disagrees with her and insisting she is smarter without engaging in any debate to prove so.

This is like, the antithesis to the fedora meme.

>>9262143
No it's not, you just think that way because you're an ideologue.
>her
gbtr/eddit

>>9262152
Child

>>9262056
But most christians are decidedly below 100 points.

>>9262193
>child
I'm 29

File: hendshek.png (44KB, 484x590px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 484x590px

>>9262231
Then you're even more fucked than anyone could have imagined

>>9262215
>doesn't know how the bell curve works
half the population are 90-110

>>9262251
But anon, that's not the christian population.
The christian population is comprised in great part of people whose average is significantly below 100.
When it comes to atheists, the majority are either east asians or europeans.

Because they're retarded faggots. God doesn't exist and if he does he should prove it. Not my job to believe in shit I can't see.

>>9262260
>chridins r SSTOPID

>>9259842
>Why is /lit/ so intellectually rigorous and clinical

>>9262272
No, anon, calm down, that's not what I said, in fact it's what you said to atheists in the first place.
I said that a majority of christians are found in places where the average IQ is well below 100, like africa and south america while atheists are mostly found in countries where the average is between 100-105. So saying that christians have on average a higher iq is easily debunked as false.

>>9262266
>Not my job to believe in shit I can't see.
I guess you don't believe in radiation

>>9262287
You can detect radiation.
You can't detect god.

>inb4 but I feel it
And otherkin "feel" their phantom cat-ears, it doesn't make it real.

>>9262260
>american still doesn't understand how a basic gaussian function works
>wants to write a sectarian and racial psychometry any how
ok, it's hardly going to be the worst idea one of you has this week

>>9262297
>detection
Irrelevant, stop being an idiot.

>>9262297
>You can't detect god.
>we have not yet created a device that detects God
ftfy

For all you plebs that don't realize it yet:

Dark matter is God.

>>9262300
It's not really though. Generally you shouldn't believe in something that is totally undetectable.

Not to mention if god exists he made a bit of a blunder by not giving us the senses to detect radiation naturally. That seems like something we should know about.

>>9262309
>materialism
ew, worse than anime is god

>>9262299
Anon, it's not smart to accuse other of not knowing what they're talking about when you so clearly don't know the subject at all.
Yes, the average of a single population is standardized at 100, that doesn't mean that population X 100 is the same as population Y 100. The average nigerian IQ when compared to the average finnish IQ is decidedly not 100, it's more like 80 something.

>>9259842
>Why is lit so intellectually rigorous

No.

>>9262309
Chuckled.

>>9262309
Why?

>>9262314
>Generally you shouldn't believe in something that is totally undetectable.
Why?
>Not to mention if god exists he made a bit of a blunder by not giving us the senses to detect radiation naturally
Why?

>>9262299
Also I'm not american.
In other words, your entire post was wrong.

>>9262326
>why are protons positive
That's just the way it is.

>>9262317
>the average
it's the mode. you're fucking retarded, don't bother relying on facts or trying math in your sci-fi novel.

>>9262328
>Why?
Because if someone tells me there are undetectable fairies at the bottom of my garden I would deduce that it is more likely I'm being rused than that they're telling the truth.

Whereas if I saw some fairies right in front of my I would have a hard time explaining that any other way than that fairies are real.
>Why?
Well because it can kill you and it's been immensely helpful for us that we can detect it since we invented the technology to do so. I'm just saying you'd think god would give us more senses.

>>9262336
Anon, you're just digging yourself deeper, in a normal distribution the mode, the average and the median are all the same value.
Also, you're strangely avoiding the fact that you said a very stupid thing when it comes to the average IQ of different populations. You do know that you have to weigh the end results of an IQ test to get 100, right?

>>9259842
the Christian apologists on this board are a very specific subset of the posters on this board

>>9262349
>Because if someone tells me there are undetectable fairies at the bottom of my garden I would deduce that it is more likely I'm being rused than that they're telling the truth
>muh lawwwwwwwwwwwwwwjik

>>9262363
Ok, in that case.

Hey, anon. There's undetectable fairies at the bottom of your garden.

>>9262349
>Because if someone tells me there are undetectable fairies at the bottom of my garden I would deduce that it is more likely I'm being rused than that they're telling the truth.
that assumption is not justifiable logically. There is no basis for it.

>>9262355
you think the IQ bell curve flat tops at the average, doesn't rise to the median, and doesn't peak at the mode.

interesting that everyone who's written on IQ or statistics disagrees with you, but i'm sure you have a very convincing argument you haven't provided me with. you're failing math for 10 year olds judged by usual standards, but i'll wait for the deus ex machina bit in the seventh chapter.

>>9262056
Yes, you're missing evidence.

>>9262368
Okay, what is justifiable logically?

>>9262121

False. Kant was an agnostic. Read the antinomy. Agnosticism is for men.

For future use, you may find these resources helpful to structure your thought:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Logical_fallacy

Next.

>>9262371
I don't think you understand what a gaussian distribution is

>>9262355
>Anon, you're just digging yourself deeper, in a normal distribution the mode, the average and the median are all the same value.

>these are the retards who want to recommend me philosophy
I don't have a broken enough Pepe for this feel.

>>9262371
>you think the IQ bell curve flat tops at the average, doesn't rise to the median, and doesn't peak at the mode.
No, anon, I don't, I just quickly summarized one of the features of a normal distribution (the equality between mode, average and median) you're just trying to move the subject away from the nonsense you typed at the beginning. No, just because population X and population Y both score 100 doesn't mean that their 100 is the same, in fact the same population over time always scores 100 despite the actual points in each subtest being different (flynn effect if positive).
Do you admit that what you said previously was quite silly?

>>9262385
>there either are or are not undetectable fairies in my garden

>>9262391
>Fallacies are bad becuz i sed so

>>9262403

Thank you for playing. Not much of a challenge, but I admire your courage for trying.

>>9262394
Anon, I sincerely hope you're just trolling me.
Here, just read this
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normal_distribution
You'll find precisely what I said in the post you quoted.
Yes, the average, mean and median in a normal or gaussian distribution are the same value. That's what a normal distribution is.

>>9262401
Well that's true isn't it?

In any given area there can only be or not be a certain thing. It can't be both as that's mutually contradictory.

>>9262417
Yeah but you can't conclude either way just based on that declaration by someone.

>>9262392
i don't think you own the trademark on it to make bell curves flat line. sorry, anon, you're retarded and can't math. the difference between those things isn't something you learn in high school. you're literally getting math children can understand wrong.
>>9262397
>Do you admit that what you said previously was quite silly?
he's not me, he's probably just an analytic fag trying to shill

>>9262421
You're right, which is why I said "it is more likely I'm being rused than that they're telling the truth."

I didn't say there's not fairies at the bottom of my garden, I'm saying there just probably isn't.

>>9262349

Is the atmosphere of planet X nitrogen-based?

Ignorant theist:
>Obviously, duh.

Unwashed atheist:
>Obviously not, duh

Agnostic intellectual master race:
>There is insufficient reason to believe either that it is or isn't; I suspend judgment.

Gaytheists and christcucks blown the fuck out FOR ÆTERNITAS.

>>9262425
Now you're just using ad homs and refusing to provide any intelligible argument because you're irrefutably incorrect.
And I'm not the guy you've been arguing with but you're so incredibly wrong. I'm a physicist, I know a thing or two about distribution functions and statistics.

>>9262439
>He doesn't know that agnosticism is implicit atheism.

>>9262439

agnostic is really the philosophy of mental midgets who will never assert certainty to anything in their lives

constitutes the largest percentage of the gamma population

>>9262425
Anon, if you don't want to admit you're wrong, either on the 100 points thing or the normal distribution thing, just stop replying, we don't know you, your reputation isn't ruined, just laugh it up and say "hehe, I was wrong but I don't have to admit it publicly, now let's read that wiki page".

>>9262450
this
the suspension of belief implies the lack of belief

>>9262391
Kant was a deist, man
read the last half of the first Critique

>>9262416
Dude, the mean in the IQ charts is everything within one SD of the mode. It's 68.26% of the population with an SD of 16 (IQ 85-115). Christianity as a world population isn't half that (31.5%). If every Christian in the world was in that population, and in the lower deviation, there would still be space for idiots in the lower deviation population.

Even in America, one of the few Christian nations left, the Christian population is only slightly higher than that. What you're trying to argue is that there is a population of Christian idiots higher than the amount of Christians present most anywhere in the world.

Most places when you look at attendance have even lower populations of practicing Christians. I looked at Brazil and about 25% regularly attend religious services, and most of them think it unimportant, while in the US, 41% regularly attend service.

>>9262450

>He operates with the dualist conception of belief
>Not even the still peasant-like tripartite conception of belief
>He cannot even begin to fathom the quadripartite conception of belief
>HE HAS ABSOLUTELY NO IDEA THAT BELIEF IS MOST APTLY EXPRESSED IN A BAYESIAN FRAMEWORK EXPRESSED IN CREEDENCES IN THE INTERVAL [0:1]
>He expects me to take him seriously

>>9262503
>He doesn't know that by definition if you don't believe in god you are an atheist.

>>9262501
Anon, please stop it, by definition the mean, the mode and the median are the same value in a gaussian distribution. 85-115 means 100, which is the mode, the median and the average. Again, by definition. It's as if you were arguing that the sum of the internal angles of a triangle is more than 180 degrees. It's not, it' can't be.

Having established that, since a significant proportion of christians is african in origin and africans for multiple reasons are low IQ, while there are almost no atheists in africa or similarly low iq countries, the average christian is going to be less smart than the average atheist. This, as of now. If tomorrow africa turned atheist, the opposite would be true, but as of now, the global christian population has a lower iq than the global atheist population, it's just a fact, I mean very little by it, in fact I only said it in response to someone who stated the opposite.

>>9262503
Bayesian shill
stop discrete-probabilizing my blurry cognitive feels
formal epistemology is autistic bullshit

>>9262534
>now it's africa
>where Christians are 45% of the population
>which is still less than the amount of people who are below the mode
You can't honestly be trying to claim Christians are definitely 85 IQ, but 85IQ is also 115IQ, unless you're Christian, then some weird form of virtue ethics statistics takes place. It's a special burden to be both retarded and arrogant.

So, where are you getting the extra Christian world population from? Do Christians take IQ tests twice or some shit? You're going to have to be original.

>>9261770

Quite an accurate diagnosis.

>having argument about god/religion with friend
>he's edgier and more extreme
>literally quotes John Lennon
>"god is a concept by which we measure our pain"
Cringed hard, that's when I knew I couldn't argue any further. Atheists just look for ridiculous "mic drop" comments to "settle" arguments.

>>9262579
>theists just look for ridiculous "mic drop" comments to "settle" arguments.
This is every liberal

>>9262590
>he brought up liberals
So what? This thread doesn't concern that.

>>9262554
>You can't honestly be trying to claim Christians are definitely 85 IQ
They aren't, they're probably more around 90 something, since there are still christians among higher IQ populations.

>>9259842
>intellectually rigorous
>shuns STEM
top jest my friend

>>9262636
Then why the fuck are you sperging out at the claim they're in an even lower dist (90-105) in >>9262056 's schema? There's plenty of room for all Christians and then some in that band, not just the idiot ones.

I'm not even going to deal with you want to
>85≈115
>~90=/=90
>~90≡90

>>9259948
>>9259948
>I derive no benefit from believing in such a concept

You can sometimes benefit from believing the opposite view, even for a moment, to see if you can find truth in it or to see if it's good/bad, etc.

>I don't have to make a case against "the creator," you have to make a case for it.

Theism vs atheism shouldn't be seen as something you can solve once for all but rather as a random choice, there's no better answer

>>9261705
1+1=2 are symbols that are used to express the fact that two objects are within the same frame and in the same shape, but shape and frame are determined by your perception so it could be said differently perceived by an other, then 1+1=/=2

>>9259842

Here's the tl;dr of the postmodern voyage we all made:

1. Religion, morality, they're all just made up! I'm going to be skeptical of nothing
2. <hedonism/nothing>
3. There's more to the human condition than rationality and rationality itself can only every be a tool to an end. There is no rational reason to do or not do any thing under the sun without irrational First Principles. The greatest first principles of all are to be found in the Christian religion. Even people who don't take the final leap will have a healthy respect for religion here because they know from experience just how little fedora-style materialism has to offer humanity.

>>9261718
>I hope that one day you will hear God who is always calling out to you. On that day, embrace him, and hold fast. Look towards him and avert your gaze. His kingdom may seem small and faint from a great distance, but as you strive towards it the magnificence and splendor come into view. When you are weary from your journey, he will give you rest.
That was beautiful
>arrogance
You should see yours though

>>9259842
>Why is /lit/ so intellectually rigorous and clinical
>Am i missing something?

...Yes.

>>9261770
This was good

And immature

But interesting

So what's the next level you might ask? Well, welcome to /lit/, the third stage

But don't get stuck

I heard a 52 yo is still there

Next stop is /x/ of course

>>9262349
>fairies
Everybody believe in fairies, or you can say that you don't know, those are the three choices, try answering this question :
What has created this universe or the universe where the bing bang happened or the one before, etc.?
You oubviously couldn't know the exact origine, some will say
1."it was god!"
2. "it was not a god"
3. "I don't fucking know"

1 and 2 believe in fairies, 3 choose to ignore the question

File: weeping246.jpg (6KB, 206x308px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 206x308px

>>9263138
>Next stop is /x/ of course

Indeed.

>>9261718
I was asking for an argument and I recieved the response whereby someone attempted to refute my own by claiming I was being arrogant. Live in somnia forever christians atleast you've convinced ne no one will convince you otherwise

>>9261705
1+1=2 under the ZFC axioms. It is not an objective property of the universe. For instance, if I were to ask you how you would write the past tense of the verb "to run," you would say "ran." This is only true because of how we define the past tense of the word "run." It is an Analytic Proposition, one that is true by definition, just like 1+1=2. The only reason 1+1=2 is because of how we define two. We set up some axioms, and eventually come to the conclusion that 1+1=2. These axioms are not objective either, they are just the foundation for the model we made to describe the universe.

So, under the current axioms of math, there are two cups.

>>9261721
>This proof for the existence of God is circular. Look here and here. The conclusion is assumed in premise two. This argument cannot work.
>LOL NO CREDENTIALS FAGGOT GUESS YOU CANT POINT OUT ERRORS IN A CHAIN OF LOGIC DICKHEAD HA I WIN

I'd love to see Socrates, Plato, Nietszche, Descartes, and Leibniz's qualifications.

>>9261666
>>9261679
>>9261705
Imagine a daemon, as clever and deceitful as he is powerful...

>>9262277
>/lit/
>intellectually rigorous
Have you read this thread?

>>9263096
Beautiful summary anon.

>>9259939
this is a good reason too. The second one I mean.

>>9259842
>Why is /lit/ so intellectually rigorous and clinical
wut

how the fuck you could ever think that lit is like that

>>9262943
>You can sometimes benefit from believing the opposite view, even for a moment, to see if you can find truth in it or to see if it's good/bad, etc.
But I have believed in God, and it did not benefit me. Knowing this, why would I believe it again?
>Theism vs atheism shouldn't be seen as something you can solve once for all but rather as a random choice, there's no better answer
It's not a "random" choice; I didn't toss a coin. I came to the conclusion that there isn't a way to prove whether or not there is a "God," and the prefabricated concept is in many circumstances contradictory (see: Yahweh), therefore it (belief in God as an overlord) is a position that provides me no benefit. There is no generally "better" answer, but there is a better answer for me

>>9262355
Not completely accurate --- there is some room for deviation from the median in a normal distribution.

>>9263074
How very Sellers of you...